3 ms·

So what's your solution then? Break all apps simultaneously that do not have extensive tests for gracefully handling cases that were impossible when they were c

So what's your solution then? Break all apps simultaneously that do not have extensive tests for gracefully handling cases that were impossible when they were created? This is not weird "hidden state" on the implementer's side. It's a straightforward dummy API and all you need to do to test it are a few straightforward asserts that it returns the correct dummy values and doesn't crash. > I have a feeling that "solutions" like this are part of why an increasing number of my computing problems take the form of, "I tried to take an action, nothing happened. No error, no activity, nothing.", and are impossible to debug or diagnose. That's precisely not what this is. The whole point of the article is to do nothing correctly. Presenting an empty list of printers is consistent with a PC that simply doesn't have any printers installed. A wrong thing to do would be, for example, presenting a dummy printer that accepts jobs but of course never prints anything. You don't break the users of your API, period. That shouldn't be controversial. Unfortunately, too many people seem to think they need to do everything over every couple of years only to produce a solution that is no more extensible and resistant to bitrot than the one they're replacing.

chrisjj 3y ago
> So what's your solution then? Break all apps simultaneously that do not have extensive tests No test required. Just try... catch. > for gracefully handling cases that were impossible when they were created? You can never know they are impossible. That is why you have a top-level try...catch.
- buttercraft 3y ago
  This is about 3rd party apps that Microsoft has no control over.
- filleduchaos 3y ago
  > No test required. Just try... catch. That doesn't even make any sense. Where on earth would you insert a try...catch? So many people commenting on this article seem to have fundamentally misunderstood what the situation/scenario even is, which is made more jarring by the fact that so many others seem to have gotten it just fine.
  - chrisjj 3y ago
    > So many people commenting on this article seem to have fundamentally misunderstood what the situation/scenario even is Agreed 100%. Those people have overlooked that this is about attempting to run apps on an unsupported OS. And when printing, the OS attempting to gaslight the user into thinking the fail is his fault for not connecting a printer.
    - Arainach 3y ago
      The apps are being run on a supported OS which doesn't have all features. Your framing is bizarre.
      - chrisjj 3y ago
        If this app supported Xbox OS, then how come: "The app that the user installed on the Xbox was probably tested primarily, if not exclusively, on a PC" ?? Note that Xbox OS is not Windows. If an app says "requires Windows", then it means requires Windows.
    - filleduchaos 3y ago
      How do you somehow both have a strong opinion about "deceiving users" and completely fail to understand the difference between a platform/OS and a device?

chrisjj 3y ago

> So what's your solution then? Break all apps simultaneously that do not have extensive tests No test required. Just try... catch. > for gracefully handling cases that were impossible when they were created? You can never know they are impossible. That is why you have a top-level try...catch.

buttercraft 3y ago
This is about 3rd party apps that Microsoft has no control over.
filleduchaos 3y ago
> No test required. Just try... catch. That doesn't even make any sense. Where on earth would you insert a try...catch? So many people commenting on this article seem to have fundamentally misunderstood what the situation/scenario even is, which is made more jarring by the fact that so many others seem to have gotten it just fine.
- chrisjj 3y ago
  > So many people commenting on this article seem to have fundamentally misunderstood what the situation/scenario even is Agreed 100%. Those people have overlooked that this is about attempting to run apps on an unsupported OS. And when printing, the OS attempting to gaslight the user into thinking the fail is his fault for not connecting a printer.
  - Arainach 3y ago
    The apps are being run on a supported OS which doesn't have all features. Your framing is bizarre.
    - chrisjj 3y ago
      If this app supported Xbox OS, then how come: "The app that the user installed on the Xbox was probably tested primarily, if not exclusively, on a PC" ?? Note that Xbox OS is not Windows. If an app says "requires Windows", then it means requires Windows.
  - filleduchaos 3y ago
    How do you somehow both have a strong opinion about "deceiving users" and completely fail to understand the difference between a platform/OS and a device?